were are we now

ajg6989 · 06-03-2007, 01:34 PM

It really is sad that americans now want their government to protect them. Yet for me you must be able to protect yourself. Every new anti terrorism law we all lose a little freedom to be protected which is not what the founders wanted are we all becoming weak and complacent like cows waiting on the land to be slaugtered. Everyone knows what Benjamin Franklin said about tradeing liberty for security and getting neither.

Aught Six · 06-03-2007, 03:01 PM

Something like that, right?

Fieldmouse · 06-03-2007, 03:22 PM

What level of protection do you expect the goverment to provide and what level will you provide?

What freedom do you feel you've lost since this war on terror?

Kybuckhunter · 06-03-2007, 03:40 PM

Our founding father didn't have a bunch of crazed Muslims trying to kill them. Are we to form a militia for our national security ?

Champlain Islander · 06-03-2007, 04:00 PM

I haven't lost anything. I am armed and trainedas per my second amendment rights and feel on a domestic front I am prepared for anything that comes up. I don't expect the government to protect me I take care of that myself. The war on terrorism has actually ratcheted up the hatred for the free world which does worry me.We tookan unknown enemy on but really haven't accomplished the goal. We were on the right track in Afghanistan but I feel the conflict in Iraq has just allowed us to take our eye off the ball. Closing our borders and deporting all the illegals is my first step in the war on terrorism. Protection has to be focused on us first then shift to other countries where we might have problems. The recent arrest of the 6 Fort Dix Muslims and more recent 3 in the Kennedy airport threat proves we aregaining on domestic protection. We can't really do the right job on that front until we control our borders and know who is here. The next thing we should do is actively pursue all Al Qaeda wherever they hide. We can't do this by being involved in the Iraqi civil war. We need tofind a way to go into Pakistan either with their approval or in a clandestine fashion to get OBL. Al Qaeda at present is one of our larger enemies. Their presence in the Saddam era in Iraq was minimal. Since the takeover they have found that country as their way to fight the west. Now that we have stirred up the hornets nest we need to eradicate them. I am not for a continuation of the war in Iraq but am for the termination of Al Qaeda wherever they live and hide. If there is a stronghold that housed Al Qaeda then we need to level it and move on. If there are collateral damage then that comes with war. Our government has to stop being PC and bringing up charges against our troops for fighting a war. People get killed in a war and when the wrong ones die we are all over it to show the world we police our own. It is war and this needs to stop. We went through this in Nam and our presence would have ended years sooner if we were allowed to finish them off. We were not given that ability and many of our troops died as a result. Take the politics out of the war and place the decisions in the hands of the trained soldiers...period. Washington needs to stop telling the military how to fight.

Fieldmouse · 06-03-2007, 04:48 PM

Champlain you have some obvious stuff I disagree with one being Iraq so we'll just agree to disagree there. I'm all for taking the gloves off and lrtting them do there thing in the military. Screw asking for permission to bomb. Forget second guessing our soldiers when they fire as to why they fired, and lets take'em out. The problem with Pakistan is we would have to prepare to take the whole country over. I do believe Afganistan has every right to persue the enemy across the boarder since they are allowing them to set up shop. If we do that though, thats when we have to be prepared to take the whole country. The people absolutely will rise up.

This isn't a simple war we finally acknowledged were in since 9-11. It hasn't grown wider since Iraq, it has finally revealed itself since we engaged. It's always been there due to the blind following ofthe failed/farse religion of Islam. It's not by any means a peacefull movement. It's a fired fueled by the Imans. Did you read the Winton Churchill post Kosherboy posted. It's pretty acurate.

Champlain Islander · 06-03-2007, 05:59 PM

Good points FM. Special forces/ espionageneed to take a larger roll in our fights beyond some of those borders. Not to say it isn't happening because if we know about it so does everyone else. I agree we don't want to and really can't go too far with Pakistan but when we had the sights on OBL and didn't finish the job with our SF troops we made a fatal error militarily. It wasn't that we couldn't get him our military was held back by politicians to allow the tribal warlords to take him out. Turned out he owned them and his escape was a foregone conclusion. Turning the clock back Clinton had the ability to eliminate his threat but for some reason elected to stand pat. The problem just got bigger and 9/11 was the end result. I suppose since the fall of Saddam the fanatical element from several religions and ethnicity have gathered in Iraq and drawn the line in the sand against the west. I am for getting out of that place but now the game has become far more complex. Most of the free world was against our invasion and now that we went in there they need for us to finish the job (gets them off the hook). Pulling the troops today isn't what anyone is calling for on either side of the isle. at least not now. There was some rhetoric before the mid term elections but now that the Dems have won the majority they taking a more focused and realistic view as a matter of self preservation. I would like to see us out of there in our active military presence within a year and feel we need to get to the root of the evil there. Time to step it up and take them out. We are shot at constantly thousands of times a day. It must be that way since we are losing over a hundred troops per month. Every time a shot is fired at us we need to call air support and decimate the area where the shots came from. Now after we are hit we go door to door and search for the bad guys and givethem time to stash the weapons and resume praying or whatever normal people do. They shoot at us we take out the whole street. Pretty soon they will stop shooting and the people of Iraq will be turning the bad guys in right and left. If we play hard enough and do what we have been trained to do we could be out of there sooner than later. I lived through the Viet Nam conflict era and can see many similarities. Different time, part of the world and religions but we fought that one PC style and the resulting public protests did nothing to help end the conflict. I put our present involvement right about the same time frame as what we were doing in 1970. It took another 4 years to finally pull the plug and that one was not on our terms. Those last few soldiers and embassy employees almost didn't make it. I wasn't for the invasion but now that we did it we need to finish it but not the way we are presently fighting. To continue along the path we have chosen will result in a long and costly hit on America. We can take out Al Qaeda just as fast as we eliminated the Republican Guard during 1991 and later when we went in country. When we invaded we went in there like soldiers not politicians.

Whitehorse · 06-04-2007, 01:03 AM

Any laws can be misused by government, look @ the FBI files during the 1990's. We will always walk a fine line in our laws. We need to be able to surveill terrorists & those who would do harm without trampling on the rights & lives of law-abiding citizens.

I disagree with Bush on the illegal alien issues; however, his administration has been very careful to not misuse the NSA surveillance & other powers. I'm not so convinced that a future administration would not misuse these powers, as well as the other powers under their responsibility.